updated penis volume calculator

I’ve updated my penis volume calculator (inches only), and did away with the metric version. The new one is still a console app, but is more compact visually as well as providing a volumetric comparison with the “average” penis (I took a fairly common Kinsey finding of 6 x 5 - approx 12 ci). I also did away with the “weight” reading, which I found irrelevant - if even accurate.

I had written a Win32 app in Delphi quite some time ago, but I lost the CD I saved it on - which also contained the source project. I kept saying to myself that I’d write one in C++ one of these days, but I never found the time. Currently, I’m boning up on C#; so, as a learning exercise, I just might put together a Windows app volume calculator in C# and upload it.

For now, this console app is in regular old C, but it serves it’s purpose and is a very small .exe (about 16 kb size on disk) - and it’s a standalone, so you don’t have to be online to use it.

http://www.freewebs.com/waxn~world/ (dead link)

I had actually completely forgotten until now:

Penis Volume Calculator…

Thanks Wad I like the size comparison on their and the sayings “youre packing a large kyack”. Very cool.

Yeah, I’m happy to know I’m packing a large kayak, but I really want a pussy splitting monster!! LOL

Thanks for the fun toy, Wad.

BFLR

Thanks Wad. I love to do this. According to Kinsey, I have a “pussy-splitting monster.” Yahoooo! :angel:

HH

Not quite sure about the reason for calculating volume.

I mean, the conversation could go something like this:

‘I’m gonna stuff you with 32 cubic inches’

‘Hold it a minute while I get the slide rule out.

‘Ah yes bone pressed it’s 6.7893 recurring’

That would give you ****** girth (I haven’t got my slide rule handy)

Forget it. Let’s go for a Chinese.

I personally think volume is a much better indicator of the size of a penis. You may not even realise it, but a 7x6 inch wang is over 50% larger then a 7x5 incher.

At 4.50 mid g x 6.25 bpel I was 10.07 -Small side of average
Now 4.75 mid g x 7.25 bpel I’m at 13.02 -High side of average
Goal 6.5 mid g x 10.00 bpel I’ll be 33.62 -A pussy splitting monster!

Leave them walking wobbly and with a hoarse voice from all the loud grunting and moaning. :D

But let’s take two sets of measurements:

w=4.6” l=6.5” vol=10.95 ci

w=4.1 l=7.8” vol=10.57 ci

Perhaps the Ladies can tell us what they would prefer given the choice? (not knowing the above calculations)

An extra 0.38 Cubic inch or an extra 1.3” actual length

Perhaps the ladies can…

-Or any one else for that matter

petitfaun,
Honestly? I would be willing to bet that the overwhelming majority of women would select the 6.5 x 4.6 over the 7.8 x 4.1.

Consider, the first unit is high-average length, and just under average girth. So, the length would be quite adequate, but the girth might actually be a little thin for most women.

The second unit is certainly longer, but at 4.1 girth it’s like a finger. That unit would just be poking in and out of her like a pipe cleaner, barely stimulating the sides - if at all.

I don’t think most women would want to be speared by a long thin rod.

I’ll take your poll 1 step further:

7.8 x 4.1 (10.43 ci) - vs - 5.3 x 5.1 (10.97 ci)…. I’ll bet that most women would give up 2.5” length (on a 4.1 girth) to get an extra inch of girth.

I seem to have troubles downloading that file for some odd reason :(

I think both of Wad’s “bets” above are safe ones.

Wadzilla,

Can you tell me what the formula is?

I’m going to work mine out in metric.

To calculate the volume of a cylinder: length * pi * (radius * 2)

http://www.1728 … om/diamform.htm